>>>You got to check what income level was taxed by 90% rate and/or (it is a bit more cumbersome) check what was the rate for 250K income recalculated to 1950s (or other period) dollars. I can help you a bit, by the way. 90% rate was applied in 1950s to 400K+ income. You may figure out now what 400K from 1950s means in today's dollars. It could mean that only Hollywood crowd would be subjected to these taxes and Obama does not want to punish faithful constituency/donors.
>>
>>Wow Edward! So the "Hollywood crowd" makes that much money. Tell us how please! How does the Hollywood crowd earn all of their money? Seriously, I'm interested because I like money. Do you really know anything about how the Hollywood crowd makes this money? For instance, Who gives it to them? Why? I just gotta know, maybe you know and could tell us all.
>>
>>TIA,
>>Steven-
>
>Firstly, you got to find out how to refer yourself properly, i.e. calling yourself in plurals may reveal certain self-identification problems. You could find a mirror around and start counting. If you get 3 or 4, then try again. It means that getting to more complicated issues, like Hollywood, is premature.

Wow! You're quite accomplished at defecting the questions. Or is it that you are so easily distracted? So Edward, let's say I'm impressed by your knowledge of English sentence structure et al. But did I express so poorly that you are unable to answer? A thousand pardons if so. Perhaps you'd share the corrections with me, then answer the questions? Show me this 'firstly' you doth speake of. What say you? Or with that can you not put up? I promise to cherish whatever teaching you may bestow. I am humble. You have important things to say and teach. Ya gotta remember us little peoples.

Still learning, still waiting, still impressed way down here,
Steven-
P.S. Do you really know anything about how the Hollywood crowd earns money?